Butte County Clerk of the Board

2008 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING CALENDAR

chapter six

oversight monitoring program for on-site systems

This chapter addresses the continued operation and management of approximately 4,200 units that will continue to use on-site septic systems pursuant to the proposed Plan. Onsite systems located in lower-density areas will adequately protect groundwater quality if properly operated and maintained. Studies performed by Butte County after the adoption of Prohibition Order No. 90-126 indicate that dwelling unit densities of less than 4 homes per acre may not cause exceedance of the groundwater nitrate maximum contaminant level. This conclusion was based upon site specific studies and literature data. In its letter of October 14, 1999, which is provided in Appendix R, Regional Board staff indicated their willingness to request that the Regional Board modify the prohibition order to allow for continued use of existing septic systems in these lower density areas.

6.1 Summary of Septic Tank Regulatory Oversight

The Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act became law in 1969 and established conditions for prohibition of the discharge of sanitary wastewater from individual onsite systems. Prior to that, water law gave the state the authority to regulate such systems. However, in the 1950's, the agency responsible for water pollution control at the time, the Water Pollution Control Board, waived the filing of reports of waste discharge for individual systems in counties that had developed an adequate ordinance. The Board still reserves the right to issue waste discharge requirements on an individual basis where there is a threat to water quality.

Septic tank systems became regulated through local ordinance and on a county or city jurisdiction basis as a means to address public health problems caused by failing systems. Septic tank ordinances also provided a process for waste water approvals for new structures. To insure the protection of public health, septic tank ordinances have historically been the responsibility of a Health Officer. Butte County Ordinance 699 adopted February 27, 1961 as Chapter 19 of the Butte County Code governs septic tanks within the unincorporated area. Under the Ordinance, sanitary sewage disposal is required (Section 19-3) and it is the Health Officer's duty to enforce the Ordinance (Section 19-16). Similar to other regulatory law, the Health Officer may enter premises at reasonable hours to enforce the regulations (Section 19-16). Denied access is subject to court review of an inspection warrant request or similar document. Denied access is extremely rare because the public generally supports the need to safely dispose of sewage.

6.2 Need for Oversight

Where properly designed and installed at low densities, and when appropriately operated and maintained, onsite sewage disposal systems in the Chico Urban Area should continue to provide safe and cost-effective service without causing groundwater pollution. In the Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95-217) Congress demonstrated the realization that conventional centralized wastewater collection and treatment systems are not necessarily the appropriate solution for all small communities and unsewered suburban areas. Congress also recognized that septic systems can be a viable and satisfactory, long-term method of wastewater treatment if they are properly designed, installed, operated and maintained.

Many experienced environmental health professionals, engineers and septic tank pumpers agree that individual septic systems are typically under-maintained. System deficiencies such as leaking tanks or broken pipe fittings may contribute to subsurface pollution without indication that anything is wrong. In the absence of plumbing backups, odors or surfacing effluent, these conditions may exist for an extended period. Users of septic systems that are experiencing slow drainage or other symptoms may be disappointed to learn that the condition of their system has deteriorated beyond the point of easy repair thus requiring the installation of new leach lines or similar major expense. The long-term useful life of a septic system can best be protected through a periodic inspection and pumping of the septic tank.

The Regional Board has indicated that to avoid substantially expanded sewering beyond that recommended herein, oversight would be required. Regional Board Staff indicated that they would propose an oversight monitoring program for those systems that are slated to remain unsewered indefinitely. This proposal would be acted upon by the Regional Board as part of a revised area basin plan amendment.

Development of an Oversight Monitoring Program

In developing the oversight monitoring program several organizational structures have been considered including the formation of a wastewater management district, a community services district, a new county service area, or possibly utilize CSA 114 with expanded authority. These alternatives were reviewed with regards to the following: ease of formation and cost of ongoing operations; assurances that the oversight monitoring program would not be intrusive to property owners; and, assurances that property owners would not hastily be required to implement sewer connections without further consideration.

Developing the oversight monitoring program for parcels within CSA 114 is also a challenge because the status of parcels continues to change. For example, upon the initial formation of CSA 114 in 1988 all parcels within the CSA were originally located in the unincorporated territory of the Chico Urban Area. Any parcel that did not have sewer service, or have a permanent solution to storm drainage, was assessed the annual CSA 114 parcel fee. To achieve a zero assessment the parcel had to meet both sewer and storm drainage requirements identified in the original Nitrate Action Plan.

In its letter dated August 18, 1999 (which is provided in Appendix K and also referred to in Chapter 2, Section 2.6 "Role of CSA 114") Regional Board staff informed the County that the provisions in the Nitrate Action Plan relating to storm drainage could be relaxed. This determination was based upon the County's recent studies which ruled out the possibility of significant nitrate contributions to ground water from surface sources.

Coupled with this acknowledgment from the Regional Board was the County's finding that at least twenty percent (20%) of the parcels which were originally included within CSA 114 at the time of its formation have annexed to the City of Chico. Many parcels continue to annex and as of November 1999 the City of Chico Community Development Department stated that up to 30 annexations are currently being organized for future consideration.

In researching the oversight monitoring program, County officials tracked parcels within CSA 114 that had either connected to sewer, annexed to the City of Chico, or both. Staff also developed an inventory of parcels, located in both incorporated and unincorporated territories of the Chico Urban Area, that had connected to a permanent storm drainage system.

At its September 14, 1999 meeting the Board of Supervisors revised its policy regarding CSA 114 parcels that are assessed an annual parcel fee. The Board adopted a policy to not assess any parcel that had connected to sewer. Further, since the storm drainage requirement was relaxed by the Regional Board, there was no longer a need to either assess parcels, or keep parcels within CSA 114 that do not have a permanent solution for storm drainage. In response to this change in policy, the CSA 114 tax roll was updated and the parcel fee on over 1,200 parcels which were confirmed to be receiving sewer service was reduced to zero. These parcels are located in both the incorporated and unincorporated portions of the Chico Urban Area. The financial effect of this change is a net annual decrease in revenue to CSA 114 of approximately $32,000 for fiscal year 1999/2000.

In the future, areas to be annexed to the City of Chico will be detached from CSA 114 upon verification that they are served by sanitary sewer. The CSA 114 tax roll database will be updated and revised annually to reflect the additional parcels which connect to sewer.

Because of the ever changing status of parcels that connect to sewer or parcels that annex to the City of Chico, and due to the abatement of the storm drainage requirement by the Regional Board, a monitoring program to oversee parcels that remain on septic systems was accepted by Regional Board staff. The description of the oversight monitoring program is explained in greater detail in Section 6.3.

City of Chico Involvement with Onsite Systems

As a result of many annexations since the formation of CSA 114 in 1988, the Butte County Division of Environmental Health estimates that 2,000 to 2,500 units that utilize on-site septic systems are located within the City of Chico (jurisdictional boundaries as of January 1999). It is estimated that at least 800 to 1,100 of these units are located in areas that are proposed to be sewered. The absolute total number of units located within the City that are affected by the Prohibition Order is still being determined.  

Connection to the sewer system upon annexation is not required by the City of Chico. Sewer connection occurs only when the property owner applies for sewer service, whether voluntarily or due to system failure. In many cases, property owners have petitioned for annexation for non-sewer reasons, such as a desire for specific city services.

The Butte County Division of Environmental Health is the local agency responsible for the permitting and installation of septic systems, regardless of whether a system is located within the City's or County's jurisdiction. Sewage disposal failures are the responsibility of Environmental Health within the unincorporated area and the City within its jurisdiction. All unsewered parcels within CSA 114 are subject to Prohibition Order No. 90-126 whether or not they are located in the City of Chico or the unincorporated portion of the Chico Urban Area.

6.3 Description of the oversight monitoring program

In its October 14, 1999 letter, the Regional Board outlines two options for monitoring septic systems within the Prohibition Order area: 1) the issuance of a Cleanup and Abatement Order against the County, or 2) the codification of a monitoring program into the County Code combined with a memorandum-of-understanding (MOU) between the County and the Regional Board.

The Regional Board's letter states that State Water Code Section 13304 gives the authority to issue a Cleanup and Abatement Order against the County, because it is currently allowing the discharge of wastewater from septic systems where it is causing pollution. A Cleanup and Abatement Order could require the above monitoring program, and also the elimination of standard septic systems, in areas where the Board determines the density of the systems would cause the exceedance of the maximum contaminant level. This density determination would take the Nitrate Compliance Plan into consideration.

The second option includes an MOU and codification of a monitoring program and would reduce the amount of staff and County resources to obtain adequate monitoring.

Regional Board staff has determined that an oversight monitoring program, administered by the County, may be an effective method of water quality assessment and protection for parcels that continue to use on-site waste water systems. The establishment of an oversight program is proposed to monitor these systems pursuant to the State Water Code which authorizes the continued use of on-site systems in lieu of sewering where water quality can be adequately protected. Elements of the oversight monitoring program are presently being developed and considered by County and Regional Board staff. Such elements include:

As part of the MOU, Regional Board staff would propose that the results of the monitoring be given sufficient time, on the order of 10 to 20 years, to establish that sewering is having the desired effect on groundwater nitrate concentrations before considering any further action in the unsewered areas.

Approximately twenty percent (20%) of the units affected by the Prohibition Order are currently located within the City limits; this occurrence is largely a result of annexations over the past decade. Regional Board staff acknowledges that further annexations will occur. At some point, resulting from the combined effects of connecting to sewer or through annexations to the City of Chico, the number of parcels located within the unincorporated portion of the Chico Urban Area will be so few as to render the operation of the monitoring program to be infeasible. It will therefore be proposed that the terms of the MOU be reviewed and renegotiated every ten years and rescinded, if appropriate. Also, as conditions warrant, it is proposed that either the County or Regional Board staff may request reconsideration of any affected provision of the MOU. It would be the responsibility of the City to petition the County for participation in the County's monitoring program or to develop its own program that is acceptable to the Regional Board.

By utilizing either the Cleanup and Abatement Order or the MOU coupled with the codification of monitoring requirements, the Regional Board has adequate authority to assure the program would be carried out by the County. County staff recommends pursuit of the second option as the preferred public policy for the following reasons:

1) This approach is a more flexible and cooperative approach than a Cleanup and Abatement Order process;

2) The program is not intrusive to property owners; and

3) Funding and codification of an oversight monitoring program is relatively inexpensive and functionally simple to implement and operate, as compared to other management options previously considered. Funding is currently available through CSA 114 to implement the program.

The policy to implement the MOU and codification of the monitoring program will be considered by the Board of Supervisors upon the finalization and adoption of the Nitrate Compliance Plan. The policy will be coordinated with CEQA requirements.

It is proposed that implementation of the oversight monitoring program be administered by the Butte County Division of Environmental Health. As of this writing it is envisioned that the current CSA 114 revenue stream will be sufficient to cover all operational costs associated with the oversight monitoring program.

6.4 Design and Operating Standards for Onsite Systems

Design Standards

Design standards for both conventional and non-conventional onsite systems will be reviewed in response to the following:

Design standards would be developed for the use of any onsite systems intended for those situations where conventional systems are inappropriate due to site conditions or other factors, including those intended as nitrogen reduction systems. Monitoring of experimental designs already authorized for installation would continue. A list of proposed design standards for Chico Urban Area septic tanks is shown in Appendix O.

Operating Standards

All systems in the Chico Urban Area not connected or not slated to be connected to the sewer system will be monitored in accord with the provisions of the County's monitoring program. The type and frequency of monitoring will depend on provisions of the MOU.

Area-wide monitoring parameters may include coliform, Total Suspended Solids (TSS), or Biochemical Oxygen Demand, (BOD), being discharged to leach fields and total nitrogen content of effluent. It is anticipated that a network of groundwater monitoring wells will be sampled and analyzed on a scheduled basis commencing several years after a substantial portion of the areas to be sewered have actually connected to the sewer system. Groundwater monitoring will consist primarily of coliform and nitrate monitoring. There are approximately two dozen shallow wells of known construction that can be used for this monitoring program.

Monitoring standards must also include a quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program to assure that samples are taken, stored, and analyzed properly. There are many such QA/QC programs available to assist in the establishment of a program.

6.5 Survey of Existing Systems

Door to door surveys are not proposed at this time. Possible future survey needs would be established based upon data developed by a monitoring program. If a survey program became necessary the purpose would be to document the condition of existing onsite systems, to identify deteriorating onsite systems so that corrective action can be taken before more serious and costly problems occur, and to locate and document sources of public health problems or water pollution.

6.6 TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION OF ONSITE PERSONNEL

Training and certification programs for all personnel who design, install, maintain, inspect, or pump septic systems will be encouraged. California State University - Chico (CSUC), in conjunction with the California Onsite Wastewater Association (COWA), has received funding through the State's 319(h) program to develop a training center at the CSUC campus.

Training courses have already commenced and courses to be offered or required include:

    1. Soil morphology and identification

    2. Basic system hydraulics

    3. Design standards for alternative systems

    4. System inspection for potential failure

    5. Proper sample collection techniques

Soil morphology classes are currently taught at several locations in California and Oregon. The California Environmental Health Association recently held such a course in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition, the many professional contacts provided by California Onsite Wastewater Association can be utilized as well as the Town of Paradise which is actively involved in providing many of the above training courses.

6.7 Waste Discharge Requirements

The authority to require waste discharge requirements for the remaining onsite systems in the Chico area is set forth in §13260(a)(1) of the State Water Code, which reads:

13260. (a) All of the following persons shall file with the appropriate regional board a report of the discharge, containing the information which may be required by the regional board:

    (1) Any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, within any region that could affect the quality of the waters of the state, other than into a community sewer system.

It is anticipated that the MOU and monitoring program will supplant the need for Waste Discharge Requirements.

6.8 SUPERSEDENCE OF NITRATE ACTION PLAN

In Section 2.5 (page 2-12) a summary was given of the Nitrate Action Plan which was adopted in 1985. In short, the Nitrate Action Plan addresses density limits on those developments that utilize septic systems within the Chico Urban Area. The Nitrate Action Plan was further amended in 1988 to establish a time line to sewer all parcels, less than one acre in size, within the Chico Urban Area. As it is indicated in Section 2.5 the Nitrate Compliance Plan will supersede the Nitrate Action Plan once it is adopted by the Board of Supervisors.

Several elements of the Nitrate Action Plan are germane to the Nitrate Compliance Plan and will be incorporated herein. A copy of the Nitrate Action Plan is provided in Appendix N. The elements from this plan to be retained under the Nitrate Compliance Plan include septic tank installation standards which are shown in Appendix O. Upon the adoption of the Nitrate Compliance Plan, the Butte County Division of Environmental Health will recommend that the Board rescind the Nitrate Action Plan and adopt in ordinance form those septic tank installation standards to be retained for the Chico Urban Area.